Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Examiner’s Note
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 15 March, 2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 16, 19, 23, 26, and 32 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 recites “a controller operatively coupled to the UWB communication nodes” which is objected to. It is suggested to be amended to “a controller operatively coupled to the one or more UWB communication nodes” to properly reference the previously recited limitation.
Claim 19 recites “an orientation of the person towards the external UWB communication device” which is suggested to be amended to “an orientation of the person with respect to the external UWB communication device”.
Claim 23 recites “the external UWB communication devices” which is objected to. It is suggested to be amended to “the one or more external UWB communication devices”.
Claim 26 recites “generate a second alert” which is suggested to be amended to “generate an alert”, because claim 26 depends on claim(s) 25, 23, and 16 which do not recite a first alert.
Claim 32 recites “an orientation of the person towards the external UWB communication device” which is suggested to be amended to “an orientation of the person with respect to the external UWB communication device”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16-17, 23, 28-30, and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Godet et al. (WO 2022/162071 A1 “GODET”).
Examiner’s note: For purpose of citations, the Examiner will use US 2024/0034274 A1 as English translation for WO 2022/162071 A1.
Regarding claim 16, GODET discloses a localization system, comprising:
one or more ultra-wideband, UWB, communication nodes (the ultra-wideband transmission/reception means M1 consist of a transmitter and a receiver [0058])
and a controller operatively coupled to the UWB communication nodes (the means M5 for determining a distance d and the means M6 for calculating a distance d′ may be located on a printed circuit 20 and connected to a microcontroller [0066])
wherein at least one of the UWB communication nodes is configured to perform a first localization operation, wherein said first localization operation is performed in a ranging mode (in the phase of authentication using two-way communication, the activation device further comprises means M6 for calculating the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device d, based on the calculation of a flight time tv of messages exchanged by said two-way ultra-wideband (UWB) communication between the access device D and the activation device SD. The distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063])
wherein at least one of the UWB communication nodes is configured to perform a second localization operation, wherein said second localization operation is performed in a radar mode (the activation device D further comprises means M5 for determining a distance d between the user U and the vehicle V. In what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061]); (the reflective UWB mode, in which the mode of operation resembles that of radar [0078])
and wherein the controller is configured to perform a predefined function on an output of the first localization operation (the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063]) and an output of the second localization operation (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061]).
Regarding claim 17, GODET discloses the system of claim 16, wherein the output of the first localization operation is indicative of a position of an external UWB communication device within a predefined space, wherein the output of the second localization operation is indicative of a position of a person within said predefined space, and wherein the predefined function comprises calculating a distance between said person and said external UWB communication device (the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063 & FIG. 1]); (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061 & FIG. 1]).
Regarding claim 23, GODET discloses the system of claim 16, wherein the output of the first localization operation is indicative of positions of one or more external UWB communication devices within a predefined space (the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16), wherein the output of the second localization operation is indicative of positions of one or more persons within said predefined space (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16), and wherein the predefined function comprises determining whether the positions of the external UWB communication devices match the positions of the persons (during the authentication phase it is therefore possible to check whether the portable access device SD is indeed near the vehicle V [0080]).
Regarding claim 28, GODET discloses the system of claim 16, wherein at least one of the UWB communication nodes is a dual-mode UWB communication node configured to perform both the first localization operation and the second localization operation (the activation device D switches from the reflective UWB mode to a two-way communication UWB mode [0078]).
Regarding claim 29, GODET discloses a method of operating a localization system, the system comprising one or more ultra-wideband, UWB, communication nodes (the ultra-wideband transmission/reception means M1 consist of a transmitter and a receiver [0058]) and a controller (the means M5 for determining a distance d and the means M6 for calculating a distance d′ may be located on a printed circuit 20 and connected to a microcontroller [0066]), and the method comprising:
performing, by at least one of the UWB communication nodes, a first localization operation, wherein said first localization operation is performed in a ranging mode (in the phase of authentication using two-way communication, the activation device further comprises means M6 for calculating the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device d, based on the calculation of a flight time tv of messages exchanged by said two-way ultra-wideband (UWB) communication between the access device D and the activation device SD. The distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063])
performing, by at least one of the UWB communication nodes, a second localization operation, wherein said second localization operation is performed in a radar mode (the activation device D further comprises means M5 for determining a distance d between the user U and the vehicle V. In what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061]); (the reflective UWB mode, in which the mode of operation resembles that of radar [0078])
and performing, by the controller, a predefined function on an output of the first localization operation (the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063]) and an output of the second localization operation (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061]).
Regarding claim 30, GODET discloses the method of claim 29, wherein the output of the first localization operation is indicative of a position of an external UWB communication device within a predefined space, wherein the output of the second localization operation is indicative of a position of a person within said predefined space, and wherein the predefined function comprises calculating a distance between said person and said external UWB communication device (the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063 & FIG. 1]); (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061 & FIG. 1]).
Regarding claim 34, GODET discloses a computer program comprising executable instructions stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium, which when executed by a localization system cause the localization system to carry out a method (the means M5 for determining a distance d and the means M6 for calculating a distance d′ may be located on a printed circuit 20 and connected to a microcontroller [0066]) comprising:
performing, by at least one of the UWB communication nodes (the ultra-wideband transmission/reception means M1 consist of a transmitter and a receiver [0058]), a first localization operation, wherein said first localization operation is performed in a ranging mode (in the phase of authentication using two-way communication, the activation device further comprises means M6 for calculating the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device d, based on the calculation of a flight time tv of messages exchanged by said two-way ultra-wideband (UWB) communication between the access device D and the activation device SD. The distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063])
performing, by at least one of the UWB communication nodes, a second localization operation, wherein said second localization operation is performed in a radar mode (the activation device D further comprises means M5 for determining a distance d between the user U and the vehicle V. In what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061]); (the reflective UWB mode, in which the mode of operation resembles that of radar [0078])
and performing, by the controller, a predefined function on an output of the first localization operation (the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063]) and an output of the second localization operation (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 18-19, 24, and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODET, in view of Howard et al. (US 2022/0141624 A1 “HOWARD”).
Regarding claim 18, GODET discloses (Examiner’s note: What GODET does not disclose is ) the system of claim 17,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, HOWARD relates to wireless communication devices. Specifically, HOWARD teaches that device 83 can determine which people or objects are in its proximity, or not in its proximity. For example, if device 83 is an adjunct associated with mom's wireless phone, device 80 is attached to the car keys and device 81 is an adjunct associated with her son's telephone, a mom can determine the proximity of her son and her keys. In response to location signals received by the adjunct device 83, the mom can determine whether or not her son and/or the car keys are in her proximity. A proximity application executed by her wireless phone can keep track of which of the devices 80-82 or 84-85 are in range and which are not, present alerts such as audible or visual alerts when a device comes in range or goes out of range, etc. In addition, the use of directional and/or distance information can augment the application to determine a nearest neighboring device or devices, plot estimated positions on a map, etc. [0119].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of HOWARD, because doing so would enable users to retrieve misplaced belongings, such as their wireless telephones, as recognized by HOWARD. In addition, both of the prior art references, GODET and HOWARD, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, UWB technology for localization.
Regarding claim 19, GODET/ HOWARD discloses the system of claim 18, wherein the predefined function further comprises determining an orientation of the person towards the external UWB communication device, and wherein the controller is further configured to generate data for guiding the person to the position of the external UWB communication device based on said distance and orientation (a proximity application executed by her wireless phone can keep track of which of the devices 80-82 or 84-85 are in range and which are not, present alerts such as audible or visual alerts when a device comes in range or goes out of range, etc. In addition, the use of directional and/or distance information can augment the application to determine a nearest neighboring device or devices, plot estimated positions on a map, etc. [HOWARD 0119], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 18).
Regarding claim 24, GODET discloses the system of claim 23,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, HOWARD teaches that in response to location signals received by the adjunct device 83, the mom can determine whether or not her son and/or the car keys are in her proximity. A proximity application executed by her wireless phone can keep track of which of the devices 80-82 or 84-85 are in range and which are not, present alerts such as audible or visual alerts when a device comes in range or goes out of range, etc. [0119].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of HOWARD, because doing so would enable users to effectively retrieve misplaced belongings, such as their wireless telephones, as recognized by HOWARD.
Regarding claim 31, GODET discloses the method of claim 30,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, HOWARD teaches that device 83 can determine which people or objects are in its proximity, or not in its proximity. For example, if device 83 is an adjunct associated with mom's wireless phone, device 80 is attached to the car keys and device 81 is an adjunct associated with her son's telephone, a mom can determine the proximity of her son and her keys. In response to location signals received by the adjunct device 83, the mom can determine whether or not her son and/or the car keys are in her proximity. A proximity application executed by her wireless phone can keep track of which of the devices 80-82 or 84-85 are in range and which are not, present alerts such as audible or visual alerts when a device comes in range or goes out of range, etc. In addition, the use of directional and/or distance information can augment the application to determine a nearest neighboring device or devices, plot estimated positions on a map, etc. [0119].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of HOWARD, because doing so would enable users to retrieve misplaced belongings, such as their wireless telephones, as recognized by HOWARD.
Regarding claim 32, GODET/ HOWARD discloses the method of claim 31, wherein the predefined function further comprises determining an orientation of the person towards the external UWB communication device, and wherein the controller further generates data for guiding the person to the position of the external UWB communication device based on said distance and orientation (a proximity application executed by her wireless phone can keep track of which of the devices 80-82 or 84-85 are in range and which are not, present alerts such as audible or visual alerts when a device comes in range or goes out of range, etc. In addition, the use of directional and/or distance information can augment the application to determine a nearest neighboring device or devices, plot estimated positions on a map, etc. [HOWARD 0119], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 31).
Claim(s) 20, 22, 25, 27, and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODET, in view of Mese et al. (US 2022/0301556 A1 “MESE”).
Regarding claim 20, GODET discloses the system of claim 16, the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16), the output of the second localization operation (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16)
In a same or similar field of endeavor, MESE relates to techniques for ultra-wideband (UWB) location tracking to perform a voice input operation. Specifically, MESE teaches that the system 100 may include an audio receiver/microphone 195 that provides input from the microphone to the processor 122 based on audio that is detected, such as via a user providing audible input to the microphone. In some examples, the microphone 195 may actually be a microphone array so that a beamforming algorithm can be executed based on input to the array to determine a direction of a source of sound relative to the microphone 195 [0046].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of MESE, because doing so would prevent unauthorized individuals from easily hacking the devices, gaining access to sensitive electronic data, etc., as recognized by MESE. In addition, both of the prior art references, GODET and MESE, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, UWB tracking and localization.
Regarding claim 22, GODET, as modified, discloses the system of claim 20,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, MESE teaches that the first device may determine whether the second device is at a location as determined from the UWB location tracking that matches a direction or location of the source of the voice input itself [0069].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of MESE, because doing so would prevent unauthorized individuals from easily hacking the devices, gaining access to sensitive electronic data, etc., as recognized by MESE.
Regarding claim 25, GODET/ MESE discloses the system of claim 23, wherein the controller is further configured to authenticate the external UWB communication device (the activation device D sends a UWB message to the portable access device SD, including an authentication request [GODET 0078]).
Regarding claim 27, GODET/ MESE discloses the system of claim 25, wherein authenticating the external UWB communication device comprises an authentication via data transfer between the controller and the external UWB communication device through a UWB communication channel or another communication channel established between one of the UWB communication nodes and said external UWB communication device (the activation device D sends a UWB message to the portable access device SD, including an authentication request. A check is then made as to whether the identifier returned by the portable device SD corresponds to an identifier pre-recorded by the vehicle V and previously paired with the latter [GODET 0078]).
Regarding claim 33, GODET discloses the method of claim 29, the distance d′ between the portable access device SD and the activation device D is found by multiplying said flight time tv by the speed of sound c [0063], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16), the output of the second localization operation (in what is called the “reflective” phase of presence detection in ultra-wideband (UWB), the distance d is calculate [0061], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16)
In a same or similar field of endeavor, MESE teaches that the system 100 may include an audio receiver/microphone 195 that provides input from the microphone to the processor 122 based on audio that is detected, such as via a user providing audible input to the microphone. In some examples, the microphone 195 may actually be a microphone array so that a beamforming algorithm can be executed based on input to the array to determine a direction of a source of sound relative to the microphone 195 [0046].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of MESE, because doing so would prevent unauthorized individuals from easily hacking the devices, gaining access to sensitive electronic data, etc., as recognized by MESE.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODET, in view of MESE, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2017/0133011 A1 “CHEN”).
Regarding claim 21, GODET/ MESE discloses the system of claim 20, wherein said data derived from the audio signal comprise a spoken command (the system 100 may include an audio receiver/microphone 195 that provides input from the microphone to the processor 122 based on audio that is detected, such as via a user providing audible input to the microphone [MESE 0046], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 20)
In a same or similar field of endeavor, CHEN teaches that the intended voice command may include a device identifier associated with the first target computing device. For example, the user may state the name of the device that the user wishes to interact with [0042].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of CHEN, because doing so would avoid redundancies and conflicts in executing the command, thereby improving system efficiency, as recognized by CHEN. In addition, both of the prior art references, GODET and CHEN, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, using voice command for computing device(s).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODET, in view of MESE, and further in view of Kincaid et al. (US 2023/0010267 A1 “KINCAID”).
Regarding claim 26, GODET/ MESE discloses the system of claim 25,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, KINCAID teaches that if the UWB accessory device 106 determines, in block 410, that the authentication was not successful (e.g., based on an improper credential), the method 400 advances to block 412 in which the access control system 100 handles the error using any suitable technique or mechanism. For example, in some embodiments, the access control system 100 may generate an audit, alert, and/or alarm related to the unsuccessful authentication [0068].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of GODET to include the teachings of KINCAID, because doing so would improve system security, as recognized by KINCAID. In addition, both of the prior art references, GODET and KINCAID, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, UWB ranging system for wireless device(s).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Webb (US 2023/0053019 A1) is considered pertinent art for the disclosure of an accessible and usable mobile device application that integrates with a technology network designed to increase an ability to orient, locate and travel within indoor and outdoor physical environments independently, safely, and securely for people with sensory disabilities and the aging population who have visual, hearing, mobility, and/or cognitive disabilities.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAILEY R LE whose telephone number is (571)272-4910. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, WILLIAM J KELLEHER can be reached at (571) 272-7753. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Hailey R Le/Examiner, Art Unit 3648 March 5, 2026